HAWK Thread

[wanderer2575]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

Ugh.  Classic example of where a pelican would have been better.

There seems to be a lot of issues here.  The entrance and exit for every approach to the roundabout has a HAWK signal.  So it seems that the DOT assumes that there is enough of a pedestrian issue here to stop all the traffic to account for pedestrians.  Yet, don't roundabouts work best when they are more free-flowing, or at least not in a situation where a whole fleet of cars will clog up the intersection once the pedestrian phase is done?  And aren't there other problems that are inherent with these two lane roundabouts?

IMO, this should have stayed as a regular signalized intersection.

I'm also thinking RRFBs would have worked.

Drivers already have a hard enough time with roundabouts.  Throwing HAWKs up just doubles the potential for mistakes and accidents.

That's what happens when you give too many options to an engineer who graduated with multiple choice tests mostly

I don't think it's that simple.  Pretty sure I've noted this earlier in the thread, but don't discount the possibility the HAWKs are there in response to, or prevention of, a lawsuit alleging insufficient pedestrian accommodation.  There was at least one legal action that was settled with the Road Commission for Oakland County agreeing to install HAWKs at roundabouts in West Bloomfield Township.  (I couldn't tell you the last time I saw a pedestrian in West Bloomfield, but of course that's irrelevant.)
https://patch.com/michigan/westbloomfield/bernstein-settles-on-roundabout-lawsuit

HAWKs weren't dictated by the Court in that case, but rather the suggested remedy by the Road Commission.

I know that.  My second point, which kalvado and you seem to have missed, is that if the study determines there will be little to no pedestrian volume then don't take pedestrians into consideration. 

You said that point was irrelevant.

If that's how you comprehend what I said, I give up.

[jeffandnicole]

NJ put up a HAWK signal on US 9 near the Garden State Parkway Great Egg Harbor Bridge to assist with bicyclists and pedestrians trying to cross a road that has sort-of a blind spot.  The bikes and peds would be heading to the new Great Egg Harbor Bridge which has a ped/bike path.

Here's the light ready to be placed over the roadway in 2019, once the ped crosswalk striping is placed. https://maps.app.goo.gl/xBL55VB8Qu83SuKD9

And in 2022, here's evidence where they apparently didn't account for the slope of the road. https://maps.app.goo.gl/u56B8t88mDv9g9mZ7

[Big John]

^^ Bicycles and Pedestrians Prohibited on the left. Then no place on the left for them after crossing the crosswalk. And no wheelchair ramp on the left either.

[jeffandnicole]

^^ Bicycles and Pedestrians Prohibited on the left. Then no place on the left for them after crossing the crosswalk. And no wheelchair ramp on the left either.

The ped/bike path is the path on the asphalt.

The ramp is coming from the Parkway, where they are definitely prohibited. Which is why the crosswalk is located where it is. Although they should have some sort of barrier between the travel lanes and the ped/bike path.

[jamess]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

My understanding is that the new PROWAG requires this in all multi-lane roundabouts going forward.

[SignBridge]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

My understanding is that the new PROWAG requires this in all multi-lane roundabouts going forward.

PROWAG. ??

[Rothman]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

My understanding is that the new PROWAG requires this in all multi-lane roundabouts going forward.

PROWAG. ??

https://tinyurl.com/2bgtaja9

[LilianaUwU]

Y'know, using LMGTFY is weird considering that with all the SEO spam, PROWAG is probably the hip new meme coin that you should invest in right now!

[Scott5114]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

My understanding is that the new PROWAG requires this in all multi-lane roundabouts going forward.

PROWAG. ??

https://tinyurl.com/2bgtaja9

Using LMGTFY? You are hereby declared guilty of Olive Garden behavior. Your punishment is to eat breadsticks until you reach the end of them.

[jamess]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

My understanding is that the new PROWAG requires this in all multi-lane roundabouts going forward.

PROWAG. ??

The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board or Board) issues its final rule that provides minimum guidelines for the accessibility of pedestrian facilities in the public right-of-way. These guidelines, once adopted, would ensure that facilities used by pedestrians, such as sidewalks and crosswalks, constructed or altered in the public right-of-way by Federal, state, and local Governments are readily accessible to and usable by pedestrians with disabilities. When the guidelines are adopted, with or without modifications, as accessibility standards in regulations issued by other Federal agencies implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Architectural Barriers Act, compliance with those enforceable accessibility standards is mandatory.

The final rule is effective September 7, 2023.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/08/08/2023-16149/accessibility-guidelines-for-pedestrian-facilities-in-the-public-right-of-way

Specifically:

Each multi-lane segment of the roundabout containing a crosswalk shall provide a crosswalk treatment consisting of one or more of the following: a traffic control signal with a pedestrian signal head; a pedestrian hybrid beacon; a pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid flashing beacon; or a raised crossing.

and

Crosswalks at multi-lane channelized turn lanes shall provide treatments consisting of one or more of the following: a traffic control signal with a pedestrian signal head; a pedestrian hybrid beacon; a pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid flashing beacon; or a raised crossing.

https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/technical.html#r30642-crosswalk-treatments

Any agency worth the paper they print on would have started incorporating the requirements into plans at least 2 years ago. The rules have been under development for an extremely delayed period of time.

Discussion on this forum goes back over a decade

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9139.msg212781#msg212781

[LilianaUwU]

So pedestrian right of way accessibility guidelines?

[Revive 755]

Any agency worth the paper they print on would have started incorporating the requirements into plans at least 2 years ago. The rules have been under development for an extremely delayed period of time.

Except some of the rules changed from the previous draft version, requiring some of the previous fixes to be revisited.

I also recall hearing that some of the PROWAG requirements require adoption by FHWA.

[Rothman]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

My understanding is that the new PROWAG requires this in all multi-lane roundabouts going forward.

PROWAG. ??

https://tinyurl.com/2bgtaja9

Using LMGTFY? You are hereby declared guilty of Olive Garden behavior. Your punishment is to eat breadsticks until you reach the end of them.

The punishment is greatly disproportionate to the crime...but message received.

[jamess]

Any agency worth the paper they print on would have started incorporating the requirements into plans at least 2 years ago. The rules have been under development for an extremely delayed period of time.

Except some of the rules changed from the previous draft version, requiring some of the previous fixes to be revisited.

I also recall hearing that some of the PROWAG requirements require adoption by FHWA.

That is correct, the rules are in an awkward place where they are final and published but still need to be adopted by FHWA and DOJ and in turn incorporated into the MUTCD.

However, most agencies are following the rules now because not doing so will likely create liability.

[jeffandnicole]

Here's an interesting HAWK installation: https://goo.gl/maps/tp7fr7Cmr5qGEa2u5

My understanding is that the new PROWAG requires this in all multi-lane roundabouts going forward.

PROWAG. ??

The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board or Board) issues its final rule that provides minimum guidelines for the accessibility of pedestrian facilities in the public right-of-way. These guidelines, once adopted, would ensure that facilities used by pedestrians, such as sidewalks and crosswalks, constructed or altered in the public right-of-way by Federal, state, and local Governments are readily accessible to and usable by pedestrians with disabilities. When the guidelines are adopted, with or without modifications, as accessibility standards in regulations issued by other Federal agencies implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Architectural Barriers Act, compliance with those enforceable accessibility standards is mandatory.

The final rule is effective September 7, 2023.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/08/08/2023-16149/accessibility-guidelines-for-pedestrian-facilities-in-the-public-right-of-way

Specifically:

Each multi-lane segment of the roundabout containing a crosswalk shall provide a crosswalk treatment consisting of one or more of the following: a traffic control signal with a pedestrian signal head; a pedestrian hybrid beacon; a pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid flashing beacon; or a raised crossing.

and

Crosswalks at multi-lane channelized turn lanes shall provide treatments consisting of one or more of the following: a traffic control signal with a pedestrian signal head; a pedestrian hybrid beacon; a pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid flashing beacon; or a raised crossing.

https://www.access-board.gov/prowag/technical.html#r30642-crosswalk-treatments

Any agency worth the paper they print on would have started incorporating the requirements into plans at least 2 years ago. The rules have been under development for an extremely delayed period of time.

Discussion on this forum goes back over a decade

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9139.msg212781#msg212781

One of the benefits of a roundabout is reduced costs, including electricity costs.  Unless there's lighting at the roundabout (which there often is), this will greatly increase the costs of constructing and continued maintenance/utility costs at a roundabout.

Ultimately, this will:  Reduce the benefits of considering a roundabout as an option when upgrading the intersection, or eliminating crosswalks partially or fully at a roundabout.

[mrsman]

I'd like to just reiterate the last few posts to make sure that I understand.

Accessibility guidelines, known as PROWAG, that are now part of federal law, require that multi-lane roundabouts with crosswalks feature crosswalks with an enhancement: a traffic control signal with a pedestrian signal head; a pedestrian hybrid beacon; a pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid flashing beacon; or a raised crossing.

Now this would likely exempt single lane roundabouts and roundabouts in relatively rural areas, but it seems that not only would this raise the cost, but many of these treatments would actually affect the actual workability of a roundabout.  The whole point of a roundabout is the ability for relatively seemless movement of traffic, with yielding appropriately the right of way to traffic already in the roundabout, and of course yielding to any pedestrian who  needs to cross.  But the implementation of a full signal would likely gum up the works considerably.  So if signals are required, why even bother with a roundabout, and not just retain or implement a signalized intersection? 

[jamess]

I'd like to just reiterate the last few posts to make sure that I understand.

Accessibility guidelines, known as PROWAG, that are now part of federal law, require that multi-lane roundabouts with crosswalks feature crosswalks with an enhancement: a traffic control signal with a pedestrian signal head; a pedestrian hybrid beacon; a pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid flashing beacon; or a raised crossing.

Now this would likely exempt single lane roundabouts and roundabouts in relatively rural areas, but it seems that not only would this raise the cost

Correct

The whole point of a roundabout is the ability for relatively seemless movement of traffic, with yielding appropriately the right of way to traffic already in the roundabout, and of course yielding to any pedestrian who  needs to cross.  But the implementation of a full signal would likely gum up the works considerably.  So if signals are required, why even bother with a roundabout, and not just retain or implement a signalized intersection? 

Roundabouts have three major benefits. Lower cost of operations, improved safety (no t-bone collisions) and improved traffic flow.

Unfortunately, the improved traffic flow negatively impacts pedestrian safety, as too many american drivers blatantly break the law and fail to stop for pedestrians. So with this change, safety will be improved for pedestrians at the potential expense of traffic throughput and added maintenance costs.

Roundabouts will still be worth building for the safety improvements. Also, in areas with little pedestrian traffic, there really wont be a cost in traffic capacity since the signal only gets activated on demand.

[JoePCool14]

Yikes. At least one of the options for compliance appears to be RRFBs. Still requires more electrical work, but not as substantial as full hybrid beacons. It's too bad there wasn't a pedestrian traffic study need as an option to bypass the requirement. It's not worth installing if you get perhaps a few dozen pedestrians per day crossing.

As for PROWAG, I'm scheduled to attend some seminars on it for work in a couple weeks. It'll be interesting to see if this is addressed.

[jamess]

It's not worth installing if you get perhaps a few dozen pedestrians per day crossing.

Yes actually, it is.

As for PROWAG, I'm scheduled to attend some seminars on it for work in a couple weeks. It'll be interesting to see if this is addressed.

Its one of the larger changes so I'm sure it will be.

The other big cost driver for agencies is no more orphaned bus stops. A bus stop must be connected to the entire sidewalk network. Having a landing pad that leads to grass is thankfully a thning of the past.